Midterm Study Guide
Midterm Study Guide PSC 321
Popular in US National Security
One Day of Notes
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Political Science
This 11 page Study Guide was uploaded by Amber Notetaker on Thursday January 28, 2016. The Study Guide belongs to PSC 321 at University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa taught by Dr. Frazier in Spring2015. Since its upload, it has received 240 views. For similar materials see US National Security in Political Science at University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa.
Reviews for Midterm Study Guide
Please tell me you're going to be posting these awesome notes every week..
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 01/28/16
Notes: Anarchy in the International System made up of: o Interactions o Decision making/roles o States as actors o Institutions (NATO, UN, World Bank) Effects how states can behave Good for strong nations Basis of interactions is POWER Current International System o Introduction of States as players State: Sovereign Nation Requires: o Population o Borders/Territory o Recognition o Form of Government o Resources Effective due to: o Provide stability o Consolidate interests o Sense of loyalty/citizenship o Regulate exchange Terrorism is an interesting case because the international system is so state centric, that historically non-state actors haven’t played a major role o Big Actors: U.S., China, Russia, France, G.B, Germany Brazil U.N, NATO, IMF Power o Power for states was typically comprised as the ability to win a war Required military capabilities and the ability to finance them Power really means getting other actors to do want you want o Economic Power is the most important Consistent with military expenditures (more money, bigger military) U.S. spends more than other 9 largest combined o Partially due to more advanced technology that is very expensive o Converting capabilities into power Function of achieving preferred outcomes Commanding change o Relational Power o Carrot and Stick alter behavior of an actor Sanctions Controlling agenda o Structural Power o Frame the nature of interactions with another actor China-U.S. interactions and Taiwan o Loss of face when it doesn’t work Russia’s w/ Ukraine Establishing preferences o Structural Power o Initial preferences and beliefs are influenced Post-Cold War democratization **U.S. has lots of structural power o Soft Power o Ability to co-opt states through persuasion and positive attraction to obtain an outcome Culture Political Values Foreign Policy China has tried to create a story about China through creation of Confucius Institute The role of Diplomacy can be o Government to Government o Citizen to Citizen o Smart Power o Utilizing power most effectively to achieve preferred outcomes Limits of military power Norms of Force Changes in types of warfare Domestic Constraints $$ Appropriateness of Response o Economic Power o Military and economic power are interconnected Longevity of strong military requires strong economic foundation Butter vs. guns argument o Resources include Size of economy Natural resources Technology Trade/finance capabilities o Implications for Security Creates interest in other States Potentially creates conditions for seeking greater influence or intervention Asymmetry creates security imbalance o Role of Politics o Institutional powers like WTO, IMF, Asian Development Bank, and World Bank solidify power for some states Interdependence: shared gains through interaction Leads to sensitivity and vulnerability Change in State A=Change in State B The China Concern o China can hurt U.S, but only at its own expense o States typically compartmentalize political/military issues from economic ones USD has a lot of stability and being seen as a safe haven for global investment o Security dilemma in Asia-Pacific leading to military competition o Conflict of interest creating possible misperception o Rhetoric fuels dilemma o Problems for US include China’s increase in military spending Increased interactions Unknown intentions Taiwan problem Natural Resources o Utilized to predict future power Problematic due to issues of conversion o Economic use of Power Negative Trade embargo Travel restriction Asset freezing Aid suspension Positive Tariff reductions Market access Power of attraction The Security Dilemma o Results from a problem of cooperation Stag Hunt Game Both states can cooperate by de- arming/maintaining status quo o One country cannot solely guarantee safety Preferences: o Mutual Cooperation through disarmament o Arm while the other disarms o Both arm o Disarm while the other country arms o Trying to Increase one’s own security threatens the security of others U.K./ Germany France/Germany US/ USSR US/China o Intensity depends on: History of Hostilities Level of Current Trust Threat posed (real or imaginary) o Elimination of security dilemma: Increase incentives Reduce costs/increase gains Decrease vulnerability Second strike, collective security, unilateral actions, inspections States tend to overestimate attainable security Reduces belief that only military power can increase stability o Offense/Defense Balance Offensive Advantage Defensive Advantage Indistinguishable Extremely Dangerous Security Dilemma Posture Distinguishable No security dilemma; Most stable Posture possible aggression o Types of Security Dilemmas o I: unstable, mutual suspicion, status quo states, defensive o II: changes to status quo, action-reaction spiral, direct conflict of interests Geopolitics o The influence of geography on who controls what and how who controls what influences geography o Technology and globalization were thought to have made geography irrelevant o Negative Side: o Social Darwinist Aspects o Justification for war o Colonialism o Association with realism o Where you are matters China vs. Brazil (SLOCs, climate, depth, centrality) Africa (Short coastlines, poor harbors, less navigable, isolated inland, harsh environments) o Technological Diffusion o Ideal US location o Small States are more vulnerable o Too large makes it difficult to govern Russia, Canada, China, US, Brazil, Australia, India, Argentina, Kazakhstan, Algeria o Geography and Tyranny o Slower development with less strong borders Only way to quicker development is with strong military and government Access to water is important o Spread of Islam Rapid spread in areas without geographic hindrances “Trading” religion o Heartland Thesis (Mackinder) Middle East is unstable due to influence from all directions Nazi Germany used it as justification for expansion o Rimland Thesis Emphasis on Sea Power Able to defend and connect Containment policy after WWII o Readings: o Ferguson (“A World Without Power”): o History is a competition between rival powers o Considers absence of power vs. a world with a bipolarity balance of power o US is limited by dependence on foreign capital, troop levels, and attention deficit o China cannot take over because it is not compatible with the free market o Nye (Power): o See above notes o Kaplan (Geopolitics): o Mainland and Rimland Thesis o States are much more limited morally because they have to watch out for everyone in their boundaries o Realists value order above freedom o The map reminds us of the many ways in which men were born unequal o Britain became a great power because it was an island secure in its borders (versus Germany vulnerable from both sides) o Diffusion of technology works better across a common latitude o Poorest countries are where geography allow for high population density but no economic growth o Jervis ("Cooperation under the Security Dilemma"): o Although actors may want the same thing, they may not be able to reach is due to miscommunication and distrust o When a state increases its own security, it decreases the security of others o In the prisoner’s dilemma, there is no solution in the best interests of all participants—rational response is to defect o Best situation is when a state will not suffer greatly from the other defecting o Cost of CD is loss of sovereignty o When one state thinks the other is not likely to be against it, but is more likely to be an ally, state A will welcome the rise in strength of state B o War is avoided through domestic costs, realizing there will be a chain of events, and the advantages of cooperation o In a game of chicken, you opt for C because CD is better than DD o When defensive weapons can be used over offensive ones and distinguished it is possible to become more secure without making others less secure o Technology and geography determine whether the offense or defense has the advantage o Wendt ("Anarchy is what States Make of It"): o Structure (anarchy and distribution of power) vs. Process (interaction and learning) o Process changes behavior but not identities and interests o See Chart above o Finnemore ("Legitimacy, Hypocrisy and the Social Structure of Unipolarity"): o World Politics in social and material o Unipoles must legitimate power and diffuse it o Laws, rules and institutions important for institutionalization and legitimacy o Legitimacy can only be given by others both domestically and internationally o Foes can undercut legitimacy through credibility and integrity Should not just be dismissed—rather diffuse power so as not to seem an international dictator o Institutionalization turns power into authority o Hypocrisy means states often don’t want to abide by international rules in order to have short-term gains and the cost of long-term goals o Three elements of hypocrisy: Actions vs. values Alternative actions are available Trying to deceive others o Illustrated by Iraq sanctions and intervention in Kosovo o Acharya ("The Emerging Regional Architecture of World Politics"): o Increasingly regionalism—pockets of conflict and cooperation o Constructed more from within instead of without o Major regional power hierarchy is US, EU-Europe, Japan, China and Russia o Regional Security Complexes (RSCs) 11 grouped into three main categories Centered (One great power) Great Power Complex (More than one great power) Standard (No great regional power) o Uses analytic eclecticism to look at understanding of regions o Two definitions of order are status quo vs. increasing tendency towards peace o US power may decrease through unifying Asia, minor states ability to align and resist, binding strategies, rival regional states leading to societal resistance o Frazier and Stewart-Ingersoll ("Regional Powers and Regional Security"): o Examines Regional Security Complexes through a Regional Powers and Security framework o Regional structure, regional power roles, and regional power orientations o Regional power roles defined by leadership, custodianship, and protection o Orientation defined by status quo, cooperation, and long- term design o Great powers can have little involvement, alter distribution of capabilities, or cause other states to encourage, deter, or reverse actions o Conflict formation, security regime, and security community o Constructivists see the possibility of a collective security designation for an RSC through which groups identify with each other o Neorealists see this approach evolving from more institutional development o Power restraining powers aim for suitable and stable distribution of power o Concert system involves most powerful states banding together for stability o Unstructured involves a non consistent means for security o Buzan and Waever argue the RSC defined by boundary, anarchic structure, polarity, and social construction o Material capabilities are important to become regional power o Realist theory contends that the behavior of states is based on power relations and differences o Constructivists focus on state identity as influencing foreign policy o Different roles include regional leader, regional protector, and regional custodian Regional leader status comes from material power and legitimacy Regional custodianship wants to maintain or stabilize order Limited by presence of societal norms Regional protector involves identification of threat and overall concern for defense Protector role shifts focus from potential threat of power itself and allows more opportunity for influence o Orientation is the inclination or preferences of states vis-à- vis the security order Unilateralism vs. multilateralism Proactive or reactive Proactive leads to stability Supports or seeks to revise status quo o Questions to Consider: o What is the International System? o How did the current system arise? o Who are the most important actors and why? o Are states the best form of organization for security? o What is anarchy and is it the best description of the international system? o What does anarchy mean about sovereignty? o Should sovereignty ever be violated and who gets to decide? o What would most people say serves as the basis of interactions for states? o If anarchy exists, how can there be order? o Order or anarchy leads to certain outcomes. What are they? o What is the role of the US? o What happens if the US stops playing its role? o Are preventative policies good for the international system? o What is the international community and how does it deal with security problems? o How do non-state actors complicate ideas about sovereignty? o Are resources power? o How does a state attain soft power? o Is military power as useful today as it has been historically? o Does it makes sense for the US to divest resources away from military capabilities to something else that might be more effective in developing power? o How important will economic power be relative to other types in the future? o How do politics affect economics? o How to institutional powers solidify powers for some states? o How much does it cost to create a new interdependence when one fails? o What threats would cause the US to respond in ways that would intentionally harm its economy? o Does foreign aid help a state’s security goals? Why or why not? o What economic conditions could lead to militarized conflict between states? o Are economic conditions responsible for the rise of non-state actors that employ violence? o Do economic conditions drive all conflict? If so, what should be done about this? o What makes the US attractive? Are other states more attractive? o What things are likely to be important with respect to states and power in the future? o Does it makes sense for the US to divest resources away from military capabilities to something else that might be more effective in developing power? What? o How important will economic power be relative to other types in the future? o How important is soft power in the 21st century?
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'